Senate has uncovered no direct evidence of conspiracy between Trump ca
Rate Topic:

Senate has uncovered no direct evidence of conspiracy between Trump campaign and Russia

By Ken Dilanian
NBC News

*EXCERPT*

WASHINGTON — After two years and 200 interviews, the Senate Intelligence Committee is approaching the end of its investigation into the 2016 election, having uncovered no direct evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, according to both Democrats and Republicans on the committee.

But investigators disagree along party lines when it comes to the implications of a pattern of contacts they have documented between Trump associates and Russians — contacts that occurred before, during and after Russian intelligence operatives were seeking to help Donald Trump by leaking hacked Democratic emails and attacking his opponent, Hillary Clinton, on social media.

"If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia," said Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, in an interview with CBS News last week.

How stupid would you have to be before this could be "surprising" to you?

It was clear LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG ago there was no "there" there. Only the certifiably insane are still deluding themselves there was any "collusion" with Russia (I mean besides the proven collusion with the Clinton campaign.)

The brainstorming here has been fruitful. We now KNOW that there are many reasons why Trump could (that’s really likely, or possibly essentially guaranteed, but I’m being nice to y’all trumptards) be guilty:
- indirect evidence
- demcrats’ truth
- leftwing talking points
- feelings
- seriousness of charge

The left's breathless anticipation of Mueller's investigation skewering President Donald J. Trump in this Russian collusion case has been curious. After Mueller's investigation of my former classmate, Dr. Steven Hatfill in the Anthrax case fizzled (for crying out loud, they dug up his pond looking for evidence) failed miserably, I'm at a loss as to why he was given this task in the first place.

I have monitored rightnation for many years and finally found the strength to post recently under the name Farmer Sue. I have long found your discourse brilliant and thoughtful and wasn't certain I could keep up with the community. I am now retired and have time to compose appropriate posts. For some reason, my name has been changed to Kansas Sue. Both are correct. Thank you.

The brainstorming here has been fruitful. We now KNOW that there are many reasons why Trump could (that’s really likely, or possibly essentially guaranteed, but I’m being nice to y’all trumptards) be guilty:
- indirect evidence
- demcrats’ truth
- leftwing talking points
- feelings
- seriousness of charge

The left's breathless anticipation of Mueller's investigation skewering President Donald J. Trump in this Russian collusion case has been curious. After Mueller's investigation of my former classmate, Dr. Steven Hatfill in the Anthrax case fizzled (for crying out loud, they dug up his pond looking for evidence) failed miserably, I'm at a loss as to why he was given this task in the first place.

I have monitored rightnation for many years and finally found the strength to post recently under the name Farmer Sue. I have long found your discourse brilliant and thoughtful and wasn't certain I could keep up with the community. I am now retired and have time to compose appropriate posts. For some reason, my name has been changed to Kansas Sue. Both are correct. Thank you.